The Federal Court of Cassation's Chamber I allowed a man, accused of aggravated money laundering, to leave the country despite a travel ban, to vacation in the coming days and also in January 2026. In mid-November, the defendant's defense requested permission to leave the country for a trip to New York, Las Vegas, and Tulum 'for exclusively personal reasons, as the trip would be for pre-planned, recreational, and vacation purposes,' for a period from December 22 of the current year to January 25, 2026, inclusive. In the filed document, obtained by Noticias Argentinas, it was noted that the Federal Court No. 1 in Córdoba 'had authorized six exits abroad without any breaches' and that maintaining the restriction imposed in 2019 would be disproportionate in a context where the oral trial is not imminent. Nevertheless, Attorney General Maximiliano Hairabedian opposed the request, arguing that the case was 'in the preparatory phase of the trial (art. 354 CPPN) to finally resolve its procedural status.' Attorney General Javier De Luca stated: 'It seems there has been no real awareness that the accused is charged with a crime for which the expected penalty is severe, and that, in parallel, the majority of those accused of crimes of the same or lesser scale are not even granted the right to go through the process in freedom.' As is common in such cases, the defendant's defense filed a cassation appeal, which was recently granted in favor of the accused, allowing him to leave the country to vacation. Among the points presented for the authorization of travel, the Cassation Court explained that there is no procedural or flight risk and that the oral trial is not scheduled to take place due to a pending appeal. In 2019, Federal Court No. 1 in Córdoba ordered a travel ban for the accused, who was charged as a co-author of the crime of aggravated money laundering due to its habitual nature and the use of fictitious persons. This conduct provides for a penal scale ranging from 4 years and 6 months to 13 years and 4 months in prison. Although a trial date has not yet been set, in March of this year, the end of the investigation and the request to elevate the case to trial were announced. The accused has always been at liberty. The prosecutor noted that although the court had authorized him to travel on several occasions, 'this took place during the investigation phase of the case, however, the parties have now been summoned to trial, so we are in different procedural phases.'
