The first time of the party ended, as expected, with a conviction. The third collegiate criminal court sentenced the former president Ollanta Humala and Nadine Heredia by money laundering With aggravating criminal organization to fulfill a penalty of 15 years in effective prisonwhose compliance was arranged immediately, from the date.
A decision that caused the arrest and transfer to the Barbadillo prison of former President Ollanta Humala. While, which was ordered the immediate search, location and capture of the former first lady of the nation, Nadine Heredia Alarcón, her brother Paul Ilan Heredia Alarcónsentenced to 12 years in prison, and Mario Julio Torres Aliagaformer accountant of the Peruvian Nationalist Party, eight years in prison.
You can see: This is how the international press on the sentence of Ollanta Humala and Nadine Heredia reported
Hours later it was known that Nadine Heredia entered the Brazilian embassy in Lima, accompanied by her youngest son where she requested political asylum. At night, the Peruvian Foreign Ministry He informed that Brazil granted diplomatic asylum to Nadine Heredia and her son Samir, so he proceeded to grant them the safe -conduct that allows them to leave the country immediately. Brazil facilitated a plane that will allow them to travel in the following hours.
The whereabouts of his brother Ilan Heredia and Torres Aliaga is unknown. Antonia Alarcón CubasRocío del Carmen Calderón Vinatea and Eladio Mego Guevara They were sentenced to five years in prison but suspended for the period of four years, under the fulfillment of rules of conduct, considering them accomplices of money laundering.
On the other hand, the former congressman Santiago Gastañadui RamírezMaribel Amelita Vela Arévalo and Carlos Arenas Gómez Sánchez They were acquitted, by not finding a link with the facts subject to accusation and trial
The advance of the sentence and prison sentence
He Third Collegiate Criminal Court It was made up of Judges Mercedes Caballero García, Nayko Coronado Salazar and Max Venoa Valdiglesias. The same magistrates who by majority declared the nullity of the trial of the Cocktails case, after a Judgment of the TC that questioned the integrity of the accusation.
The reading of the advance of the sentence was in charge of the doctor Nayko Coronadowho served as director of debates at the trial. The magistrate Max Venoa issued a vote in discord regarding the probative framework of the funds from Venezuela. But, it coincided with respect to Brazil and the sentences imposed.
The details of the sentence in a comprehensive manner will only be known on April 29. That day the lawyers of the convicted may appeal the verdict to be reviewed by the National Appeals Room of the Superior Court of Specialized Criminal Justice. The case can probably reach the Supreme Court.
Prosecutor Germán Juárez Atoche can also appeal. Juarez had asked for an effective prison sentence of 20 years and 26 years for Humala and Nadine, respectively. In addition, he requested the dissolution of the Peruvian Nationalist Party, which was rejected by the Court. For the judges, the aforementioned political party was not created to commit crimes, but on the road would have been instrumentalized by Humala and Heredia to wash the money of illicit origin that they would have received during the presidential campaigns.
The judges only accepted the dissolution of the company All Graph which would have been created by Martín Belaunde and Jorge Chang Soto specifically to launder money of unknown origin. He Peruvian Nationalist Party He received a fine of 100 UIT.
The reasons for the judges
Dr. Nayko Coronado explained that they reached a decision by probative indications, in the absence of direct evidence of the facts subject to trial. In principle, these indications are the existence of false contributors in the 2006 election campaign and after the 2011 campaign, which is established from the testimonies of the witnesses presented by the Prosecutor’s Office.
They noted that the witnesses allow us to establish that in the 2011 campaign, funds of unknown origin were received by more than one and a half million soles. Meanwhile, in the 2011 campaign contributions of unknown origin by more than 4.3 million soles. For the judges, the existence of these funds of unknown origin and the attempt to hide them, only has a possible explanation: it was known that they were illicit.
Likewise, they concluded that the work contracts presented by Nadine Heredia with total support, oil palm, The Daily JournalNews channel operator, KaysamakCapillary centers were fictitious because they responded to a scheme where Ilan Heredia put the money, from the accounts of the Nationalist Party, and then it returned to Nadine’s accounts, via the fees payments.
You can see: Ollanta Humala’s lawyer exposes final allegations in trial for contributions from Venezuela and Brazil
From which it was established that Ollanta Humala, Nadine Heredia, Paul Heredia and Mario Torres performed actors of money laundering, with the complicity of Rocío Calderón,Antonia Alarcón and eladio mego. The way in which each one would have participated in the commission of the crime will be known when the full verdict is read. The room puts Nadine Heredia in the center of the organization.
Nadine’s agendas were also accepted as valid test by considering that they were not proven that they were stolen and that they do not affect intimacy because they were used by various people to make annotations. Meanwhile, it was ruled out that the defendants had patrimonial imbalance.
On the illicit origin of Venezuela’s money, they noted that Peruvian legislation does not require that there is corroboration of previous illicit activity. They even said, it can be a crime that is not yet known. For the judges Nayko Coronado and Mercedes Caballerowhich support the majority, it is possible to establish that Venezuela’s money has an illicit origin for the political context that is lived in that country.
Regarding the illicit origin of the contributions from Brazil, they considered enough the written statements of Jorge Barata and Marcelo Odebrecht about the existence of parallel accounting in the Odebrecht company and an alleged request of former President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva To give money to former President Ollanta Humala in 2011. Barata and Odebrecht did not declare publicly at the trial.
They emphasized that although Humala’s defense proved that Antonio Palocci’s judgment was annulled by the Justice of Brazil, this does not neglect the existence of the illicit activities of the construction company.
A triumph for the Prosecutor’s Office
The prosecutor Germán Juárez Atochein charge of the investigation and the accusation, and the senior prosecutor’s coordinator of the Special Lava Jato TeamRafael Vela Barba, qualified the decision as a historical sentence that does justice and demonstrates that prosecutors are not carrying out a political persecution.
“This is the path that will mark the course for the other cases, there is even a case that has fallen (the Cocktails case), but that has not been lost, and that I am sure it will have the same consequences of this conviction,” said Juárez Atoche.
You can see: Lava Jato: Supreme Court of Brazil annuls all processes against former Minister Antonio Palocci
“The consequence of this sentence in future cases is clear: in Peru, within a due process, there are no untouchables. The laws are for all, even for a former constitutional president of the Republic. That is why they attack us, for doing our work, because we have not set ourselves, because we have always faced and have submitted to justice,” said the coordinating prosecutor.
Vela and Juárez sympathized with the suspended prosecutor José Domingo Pérezwho was accompanying them in their contact with journalists. The Prosecutor’s Office indicated that he accepted the decision of the judges although they would not have proved them at all points of the accusation.
An outrage and will appeal the condemnation
Wilfredo Pedraza and Julio César Espinozalawyers of Ollanta Humala and Nadine Heredia considered unfair and abusive that the court has provided the immediate execution of the sentence. They pointed out that there is a judgment of the Constitutional Court that indicates that the immediate execution of an incomplete sentence cannot be provided, which is what occurs during an advance of the ruling. Both announced that they will appeal.
“The immediate execution of a criminal sentence can only be made after the ruling. Constitutional Court. Then, ordering the execution of a penalty that must also be reviewed in the second instance and whose specific foundations we do not know, is unconstitutional, “said Julio César Espinoza.
“Mr. Humala is impressed by this decision. In our calculations and projections, we had ruled out an immediate execution, mainly because it is domain of the legal community that sentences must only reasonably be fulfilled after being confirmed in the second instance, because this is what the TC provides. What happened today seems like an outrage,” said Pedraza
Nadine gets political asylum in Brazil
Shortly before the third collegiate criminal court concludes the reading of the sentence, Nadine Herediaaccompanied by the youngest of his children, entered the Brazilian embassy in Lima and requested political asylum to President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva.
At night, the Foreign Ministry reported that the government of President Dina Boluarte granted a diplomatic safe -conduct that allows her to leave the country, accompanied by her son, to Brazil. The press release states that Brazil agreed to grant asylum to Nadine Heredi and her son and requested that within the framework of the Convention on Diplomatic Asylum will be allowed to leave the country. The Government proceeded to grant them the salvoconducts to be able to leave the country without the police being able to prevent it.
You can see: Brazil justice ratifies annuling processes against Marcelo Odebrecht for the Lava Jato case
Nadine Heredia would leave the country immediately. Peru and the Government of Brazil managed a flight that allowed the former first lady of the Nation to travel from Lima to a city of Brazil, where she will remain as a political refugee.
The lawyer Carlos Caro Coria He explained that, although the convention on diplomatic asylum excludes common crimes, it is up to Brazil to determine if Nadine Heredia is subject to political persecution. On the conviction, Caro considered that the ruling integrated to know the reasoning of the judges.
“The probative sufficiency with respect to the previous crime, for the very general or vague moment with respect to 2006. The major doubt, for the moment, is in the way Ollanta Humala and Nadine Heredia” washed money “, considering that the acts of consumption do not configure money laundering, as a general rule. The knowledge of the illegal origin, something not treated in the advancement of failure, but determining because in Peru Discourage, the blame is unpunished, “he explained on social networks.
