2024-09-17 04:02:33
The Supreme Court had requested talks between the judge and Luis Hermosilla in the context of the removal case against him, where his permanence in the Judiciary will be decided.
Lawyers Juan Carlos Manríquez and Cristobal Osorio, defenders of Angela Vivanco, They asked the Prosecutor’s Office not handing over the chats between the minister and Luis Hermosilla, which are part of the Audios Case, to the Supreme Court.
In their presentation to the Public Prosecutor’s Office, released by Emol, Angela Vivanco’s lawyers indicated that “We are here to oppose the request made by the Supreme Court to access the private conversations of Minister Vivanco with Luis Hermosilla Osorio or othersproceeding to deny the delivery of data and personal information that is part of a criminal investigation subject to legal secrecy for third parties to be added to an administrative inquiry, without an express legal source authorizing it, in accordance with articles 19.2 and 19.3 of the Constitution.”
The Supreme Court had requested talks between the judge and Luis Hermosilla in the context of the removal case against him, where his permanence in the Judiciary will be decided.
This, while the Public Prosecutor’s Office investigates Vivanco for possible influence peddling, bribery and incompatible negotiation.which caused the judge to voluntarily hand over her computer and cell phone.
The justification given by the judge’s lawyers for denying access to the chats with Hermosilla is based on the law on the protection of privacy and the organic law of the Public Prosecutor’s Office.
“The National Prosecutor’s Office, as the body in charge of the custody of said database in order to process the Hermosilla chats, requires a legal source that authorizes it or consent for its delivery to third parties, both matters that do not exist in the case. Failure to comply will force the immediate elimination of said information by the person responsible for the database and will give rise to the corresponding compensation for damages. In turn, violating a criminal investigation by delivering copies of it or its parts to someone who is not involved is a crime,” he argued.