In the midst of the political scandal in Cuyo land for the millionaire subsidy to an evangelical pastor and former provincial senator who allied himself with the government front Cambia Mendoza, the Justicialista Party advanced with the criminal complaint against the Government commanded by the radical Rodolfo Suarez . The person in charge of presenting the legal action was the Kirchnerist national senator Anabel Fernández Sagasti , who approached the Prosecutor’s Office to initiate the formal investigation, accompanied by the lawyer Carlos Blanco .
The head of the Mendoza PJ, one of the swords of Cristina Kirchner in Congress, as announced last Friday, delivered a letter to the judicial authorities on Monday, emphasizing the possible commission of the crimes of illicit enrichment, bribery and trafficking of influences, among others.
Thus, the legislator seeks to determine criminal responsibilities after the political agreement reached by the local Executive Power with the Social Action Foundation, of the religious and former legislator Héctor Bonarrico , for more than 18 million pesos, so that he would drop his candidacy for the Provincial Legislature in the last elections. This is what Bonarrico himself implied, according to the statements attached to the complaint.
Former Senator Hector Bonarrico
Although the delivery of the money did not materialize , since when the agreement was published in the Official Gazette last week, the president discharged him in less than 24 hours, Peronism decided to take the case to court and demand explanations mainly from who put the signature, beyond Bonarrico: the Minister of Government, Víctor Ibañez , and the treasurer of the foundation, Eduardo Erario , “and other people who were involved in the hiring.” The Prosecutor’s Office of Investigation No. 7 of Economic Crimes, in charge of Flavio D’Amore , received the document and the evidence offered by the PJ.
“We are going to go to the last consequences to determine if it is an isolated event or if it is a modus operandi of the provincial government,” said the national senator.
In the presentation before the Justice, Sagasti explained that the investigation focuses on the possible commission of the following crimes contemplated in the Penal Code: negotiations incompatible with the exercise of public functions (article 265), a crime that is configured before the involvement in contracts or public operations for the benefit of the official who must intervene; illicit enrichment of officials (article 268 (2)); embezzlement of public funds (article 261 second assumption); and bribery and influence peddling (article 256).
Anabel Fernández Sagasti, after presenting the criminal complaint in the Public Prosecutor’s Office of Mendoza
Likewise, according to what was stated by the PJ authorities before the Prosecutor’s Office, the journalistic statements of former Senator Bonarrico were incorporated in which he acknowledges that “the donation that the province was going to make in favor of his foundation was made in compliance with an agreement politician that his Social Action Movement Party (MasFe) made with Cambia Mendoza due to the closing of candidacies in the last elections, in which MasFe did not have candidates and Bonarrico did not present himself to renew his seat in the Senate.
Meanwhile, the brief released by Sagasti also alludes to the fact that the provincial government is trying to “divert the investigation and blame only Bonarrico”, with the presentation made by Minister Ibañez for attempted fraud against the State.
The agreement with the pastor and former legislator was signed by the Minister of Government of Mendoza, Víctor Ibañez.
“This minister has signed each and every one of the acts on which the complaint is based. If Bonarrico has committed a crime, Ibañez has necessarily co-authored it . The idea of ignoring the motivation of the collaboration agreement is totally absurd, which is nothing more than the political and electoral agreement they made to defraud the State”, indicates the denunciation of Peronism from Mendoza.
Likewise, from the PJ they made it clear that the reversal of the granting of the subsidy “in no way exempts those denounced in the letter from responsibility or from being investigated for the fact.”