Court closes case over Macri government’s $57 billion IMF loan
Translated from Spanish and summarized by DistantNews. Read the original for the full story.
At a glance
- Argentina’s Federal Court dismissed the investigation into the Macri government’s 2018 IMF loan agreement, which was expanded to $57.1 billion.
- Judges Pablo Bertuzzi and Mariano Llorens said the decision fell within the political powers of the state and that prosecutors had not established criminal conduct.
- The ruling removed former President Mauricio Macri and several former and current officials from suspicion, although prosecutors can appeal.
Argentina’s Federal Court has closed the case over the Mauricio Macri government’s 2018 borrowing agreement with the International Monetary Fund, saying the decision was political and prosecutors had not proved a crime.
There are matters belonging to the powers of the state that escape judicial control
The ruling came from judges Pablo Bertuzzi and Mariano Llorens. They said some matters belonged to the political branches of government and fell outside judicial review. The original agreement covered $50 billion and was later expanded to $57.1 billion.
The investigation examined whether the loan involved fraudulent administration or abuse of authority. Prosecutor Franco Picardi had pointed to the absence of congressional involvement, the lack of a presidential decree formalizing the agreement, the absence of input from the chief of staff, and the Finance Ministry’s role instead of the Treasury Ministry.
criminally relevant conduct
Picardi also cited the lack of a Central Bank opinion required under Law 24.156 and the opening of administrative files after the agreement had already been signed. A SIGEN report estimated potential damage to the state at $29.618 billion, but the court said that figure was not enough to support an accusation.
not every issue linked to the procedural forms of public administration constitutes an offense
The judges said the case contained no “criminally relevant conduct” and that procedural problems in public administration did not automatically amount to a crime. They also said there was no basis to infer that the defendants intended to violate the law, citing the financial urgency surrounding the negotiations. The Treasury solicitor’s office under President Javier Milei withdrew as a private complainant, leaving the prosecution as the only party able to appeal.
It is not possible to infer that the defendants’ conduct was guided by the purpose of violating the law
Originally published by La Nación in Spanish. Translated, summarized, and contextualized automatically by DistantNews, with a note on how the source frames the story. Not individually reviewed before publishing. How this works.