In a last-ditch effort to win the battle in the Odebrecht case, the Public Prosecutor’s Office will try to prove to the Constitutional Court that the judges of the Third Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court not only violated the precedents of both high courts but also, by means of jurisprudence, repealed and modified laws.
This is stated in the appeal for constitutional review that the prosecution body submitted to the TC through the Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office, attacking the judges’ sentence. Francisco Antonio Jerez Mena, Nancy Salcedo, Fran Soto and Maria Garabito last July 31st.
That sentence acquitted, due to alleged lack of evidence, the only people convicted in the trial for the US$92 million in bribes paid here by the Brazilian construction company: the former Minister of Public Works Víctor Díaz Rúa; and the businessman and advisor to Odebrecht in the country. Angel Rondon.
You can read: Open bridge in Dajabón will only allow the exit of Haitians
Reasons to attack
There are seven reasons why the Pepca decided to take the SCJ’s decision to the TC. Firstly, the Pepca claims that in its decision the SCJ “denaturalised the appeal for cassation”.
The Court adds that it also dismantled the public contracting system established in Law 340-06, as well as the system of sworn declaration of assets. “It repealed illicit enrichment through jurisprudence, and through the same means it modified Law 340-06,” says the Pepca. It highlights that the judges of the SCJ ruled against the high court’s own precedents, “and contradicted several precedents of the Constitutional Court.”
Pepca is looking for reverse the sentence and increase the sentence for those acquitted.
