Argentina has fully cooperated and made an extraordinary effort to provide all reasonably relevant information in an unprecedented volume, official sources stated. However, they warned that the process "has been distorted and transformed into a tool of harassment, aimed at hindering the normal functioning of the state." In this sense, they argued that "the systematic harassment of a sovereign state and an ally of the United States, through intrusive and disproportionate discovery requests, directly affects Argentine sovereignty and international relations." According to official sources, the plaintiffs "escalated their demands to increasingly legally unacceptable, invasive, costly, and completely unrelated to the purpose of the process requests, to the point of turning discovery into a political and financial pressure tool rather than a reasonable procedural mechanism." One of the most sensitive points highlighted by the Attorney General's Office was the offensive by Burford Capital, the main financier of the funds suing Argentina. Additionally, they requested information on the location of the gold reserves of the Central Bank of the Argentine Republic. In this regard, the government emphasized that these reserves "are the property of the Central Bank and, as such, are protected from execution," making them non-executable assets. Consequently, any request for information on these assets was deemed "manifestly improper" and contrary to the basic principles of international law. The judicial process will not have an immediate resolution. In this context, they stated that the plaintiffs explicitly expressed their intention to "throw sand in the gears" of Argentina's economic recovery, a behavior that the government qualified as legally and morally unacceptable. Finally, the Attorney General's Office reaffirmed that the Argentine Republic will continue to use all available legal tools in all possible judicial instances to defend its sovereignty, the rule of law, and to halt requests it considers illegitimate and violating its Constitution, its laws, and the fundamental principles of international law. Sources consulted: Attorney General's Office of the Nation; Southern District Court of New York; Clarin; La Nacion; judicial information on the YPF case; background of the litigation over the 2012 expropriation. In mid-January, Burford requested that the court declare the country in contempt, a measure that could lead to economic sanctions and potential seizures. The plaintiffs have until March 5 to present their counter-reply, and only in the hearings scheduled for the 23rd and 24th of that month will Judge Preska decide whether to grant or deny the contempt petition against Argentina. From the Attorney General's Office, they emphasized that since the current government took office in December 2023, the country has fully complied with the obligations imposed by the US court. Buenos Aires, January 27, 2026 – Total News Agency-TNA – In the framework of the lawsuit being processed in the New York courts over the 2012 expropriation of YPF, the Argentine government formally requested the immediate suspension of the delivery of chats and emails of officials and former officials ordered by US justice, as well as the dismissal of the petition to declare Argentina in contempt driven by the plaintiff funds. The motion was filed early Wednesday morning by the Attorney General's Office before the Southern District Court of New York, while the country awaits key definitions on the finality of the ruling that condemned Argentina to pay $16.100 billion, plus accumulated interest since September 2023, in favor of the plaintiffs. The filing included a petition for a stay of the discovery process ordered by Judge Loretta Preska, which allowed the funds to access private communications, emails, and WhatsApp messages from officials of the current economic team, headed by Minister Luis Caputo, and from former members of the area during Sergio Massa's administration. From the Attorney General's Office, they warned that the continuation of this mechanism constitutes an unacceptable infringement on national sovereignty.
