The move came just a day after it became public knowledge that the judge would have celebrated his birthday there, a fact that, in itself, is not minor: celebrating on a property under investigation whose alleged owner is at the center of the case not only looks reckless, but also, in terms of public perception, feeds the idea of collusion between the judiciary and real power. In a formal note addressed to the president of the court, Diego Barroetaveña, and the Board of Superintendence, Mahiques invoked “circumstances of a strictly functional nature” to step down from the acting role. If the property is under suspicion for money laundering, the financing of a social event there — and the actual list of attendees — could be relevant to understanding networks of connection and closeness. Mahiques himself denied days ago that he had celebrated his 74th birthday there, and when asked, he uttered a phrase that ended up fueling the debate: “And if it were true, what would be the problem?”. And when that trust is damaged, it is not enough to say that everything was “functional”. In his writing, the appellate judge also referred to that “institutional uncertainty,” as if the court needed predictability. The resignation from the acting role defuses the immediate procedural risk, but it does not extinguish the underlying question about ties, favors, and closeness. Today, the case will continue its course in Cassation with a different composition. He relied on article 19 of the National Constitution to assert that they should evaluate him based on his rulings and not his private life. Mahiques' acting role in Hall I placed him in the line of fire of a sensitive decision: to define whether the investigation into the Villa Rosa estate, in the district of Pilar, remains in the hands of the federal judge of Campana, Adrián González Charvay — as the accused want — or returns to the Economic Criminal jurisdiction with the judge Marcelo Aguinsky. In that context, for a judge called to decide the fate of the case to be socially linked — even through a celebration — to the investigated property is not a detail: it is a signal. But for a good part of public opinion, the predictability that is demanded is another: that judges do not operate in gray areas when they must, precisely, control the powerful. Behind this discussion, the case of the Pilar estate serves as an uncomfortable mirror. Behind that dispute there is more than a fight over jurisdictions: it is at stake who leads the case, how the origin of funds is investigated, and, above all, who the true owner is of a property valued at around US$ 20.8 million that appears in the name of a monotributista and his retired mother, identified in the case as possible frontmen. Mahiques' resignation from that acting role rearranges the board, but it does not erase what triggered the scandal: the alleged birthday celebration in the same investigated property. According to journalistic reconstructions based on confidential testimonies, the celebration brought together more than twenty guests, including judicial officials and actors with well-oiled ties to the world of football. His explanation focused on the workload and the administrative complexity of the function: he detailed that Hall I handles hundreds of pending cases — he spoke of more than 300 processes —, in addition to appeals and resources, and warned that maintaining that pace could affect the normal functioning of the court. However, the context makes it difficult to believe that it is just a “technical” decision. Buenos Aires - February 24, 2026 - Total News Agency - TNA — The appellate judge Carlos Mahiques presented his resignation from the acting role he exercised in Hall I of the Federal Chamber of Criminal Cassation, just as that court was set to resolve a key point in the investigation for alleged money laundering linked to the already famous Pilar estate attributed to Pablo Toviggino, number two of the Argentine Football Association (AFA). The data is not folklore. The Executive Branch, through President Javier Milei, has already asked the Senate for a new agreement to enable that extension for five years, an instance that opens political and judicial debate because, beyond its constitutional framework, it places a judge in a situation of depending on a political decision to remain in office. In cases of this magnitude, the problem is not only what a magistrate decides, but the social credibility of why he decides it. The situation becomes even more sensitive due to another parallel chapter: Mahiques seeks to be allowed to continue in the magistracy until he is 80 years old, when by law and general rule he should retire next year upon turning 75. It is necessary to explain what society is already asking out loud. But for a judge who could intervene, even on an acting basis, in a case linked to the same place as the party, the “inconvenience” is evident: the appearance of impartiality is part of impartiality. But the damage is already done: the episode has left a suspicion that erodes trust in a system that, to function, needs something as basic as people believing that Justice plays fair. He did not mention the birthday episode or the case he had to analyze as a temporary member of that hall in any line. In this climate, the question that remains floating is direct and very concrete: who paid for the party at the estate? In the halls of Comodoro Py, the comment went from “an open secret” to an open problem when the investigation into the AFA leadership escalated and the Pilar estate became a symbol of the case. The investigation seeks to determine if formal, low-profile structures were used to hide the true owner and if there were money laundering maneuvers.
