Buenos Aires, November 29 (NA) — The Federal Chamber IV ruled that the case investigating the death of Diego Fernández Lima will be returned to the beginning, thus confirming the annulment of the dismissal of Cristian Graf to continue the investigation.
According to the resolution signed by judges Ignacio Rodríguez Varela, Hernán Martín López, and Julio Marcelo Lucini, to which the Argentine News Agency had access, the Tribunal stated that «only in this way could an investigation be initiated to clarify what really happened, assigning responsibility under article 45 to all those who may have intervened in the event that led to the death of Fernández Lima».
The magistrates emphasized that the requirements to apply article 336 of the Criminal Procedure Code, which allows for the closure of a case, are not met, pointing out that this decision «must be supported by evidence that gives it negative certainty» and recalling, as a precedent, the ruling in the «Lotocki, Aníbal Rubén without prescription» case.
Furthermore, they underlined «the evident need for an investigation» in order to find the truth of the facts, protect the rights of the victims, and advance in the determination of the legal qualification «which, beyond its mutability, has implications in different procedural institutes».
Therefore, the Tribunal resolved to «declare the nullity of the fiscal opinions that preceded the questioning of Graf, of the questioning act and of his dismissal», and ordered the file to be returned to the original court.
In dialogue with Noticias Argentinas, Javier Fernández Lima, the victim's brother, emphasized: «We are very happy, it is very good news. This decision is for the memory of Diego and my father who died seeking the truth».
In conversation with this agency, Martín Díaz, one of Graf's defenders, indicated that based on this decision, «by declaring the nullity of both opinions, it declares the nullity of the hearing and consequently the nullity of the dismissal, because without an opinion or hearing, there is no accusation for which to be dismissed».
In turn, Díaz considered that, «in theory», the decision can benefit his client because «today he is a citizen who is not even under a mantle of suspicion. In some way, he would no longer be accused of any crime, and that is doing our job well».
«I always said that the accusation was not correct and that it was based on unreal factual data and fallacies».
