The Federal Oral Court 7, responsible for conducting the trial of the case known as 'Cuaderno Case', rejected a request from the former chief of staff of the Kirchner government, Juan Manuel Abal Medina, for his case to be investigated in the electoral jurisdiction. Abal Medina's defense argued that the money he allegedly received was part of campaign contributions.
Abal Medina's request was submitted to the Federal Oral Court 7, which has not yet established the start date of the trial. Days after this request, the Federal Chamber of Cassation ordered that one of the businessmen prosecuted in the case, Ángelo Calcaterra, be investigated in the electoral jurisdiction. However, this decision of Cassation is pending confirmation, as the prosecution appealed to the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation.
The Court rejected Abal Medina's request, stating that the possible transfer of the case to the electoral jurisdiction is delaying the possibility for him and the public to obtain answers regarding the corruption charges brought by the Public Prosecutor's Office. Abal Medina's defense argued that the alleged payments he received were related to contributions from companies, including IECSA, in which Calcaterra is a shareholder and cousin of former president Mauricio Macri.
It is noteworthy that the Federal Chamber of Cassation excluded Ángelo Calcaterra from the future trial for corruption charges and referred his case to the electoral jurisdiction, based on his claim that he made contributions to the 2013 electoral campaign, although these were possibly not recorded according to current regulations. The Federal Oral Court 7 emphasized that the Cassation resolution is not yet final and that the evaluation of the actions of the accused, including Abal Medina, should take place during the oral trial.
