The Court of Appeals of Copiapó rejected this Friday the request of the Prosecutor’s Office to challenge deputy Jaime Mulet (FRVS) and did not give rise to the formation of a case against the parliamentarian for bribery.
In a divided ruling, the First Chamber of the appellate court – made up of the ministers Marcela Araya Novoa, Aida Osses Herrera Y Rodrigo Cid Mora– rejected the action filed because it considered that the conduct attributed to Mulet did not entail the criminal responsibility attributed and that the background information provided by the prosecuting entity was insufficient to deprive him of the jurisdiction that protects him.
You may also like:
From the Atacama Regional Prosecutor’s Office they indicated that they will analyze the Court’s ruling and decide whether or not to appeal to the Supreme Court.
According to the Prosecutor’s Office, the former mayor of Tierra Amarilla osvaldo delgado (deceased), arranged and advised by lawyers Jaime Mulet (today deputy), Ramon Briones Y Hernan Bosselinrequested and accepted in violation of the duties of the position, the payment of economic benefits for the municipality and third parties, from the Minera Candelaria company, agreeing to a transaction contract on environmental damage, in contravention of the law.
“Finally! Five years of an unfair investigation,” Mulet wrote on his Twitter account after the ruling of the Copiapó Court of Appeals.
At last!!!!! 5 years of an unfair investigation. pic.twitter.com/nEbpU7fG1C
— Jaime Mulet (@Muletjaime) December 9, 2022
“A cursory reading of the facts that are imputed to Deputy Mr. Mulet Martínez is enough to be able to notice that there is no clear, concrete, specific and categorical development regarding the hypothesis of authorship that is imputed to him, since only expressions are observed absolutely generic, vague, and imprecise statements by which he is accused of planning the events for which he was formalized,” the Court of Appeals said in its ruling.
“There are a series of situations in which the prosecuting body makes an attribution of intentions with respect to the parliamentarian Mr. Mulet Martínez, which are not factually justified, nor probatively justified, according to the merits of the antecedents that were asserted in the request for impeachment. and at the time of hearing the case,” added the appellate court.