Wilman Terán must wait for the judge’s decision in the Judicial Independence case

2024-08-27 05:04:36

A date is expected to be announced to decide whether or not to call a trial in the Judicial Independence case.

The case Judicial Independence completed a new stage: the presentation of the arguments of the defendants’ defense.

This Saturday, July 20, 2024, starting at 2:00 p.m., the hearing took place where those involved and their defense attorneys had the opportunity to exercise their right to defense. Wilman Teranformer president of the National Council of the Judiciarydid so on a personal basis.

Judicial Independence and Wilman Terán

In the National Court of Justice (CNJ)Associate Judge Julio Inga reinstated the preparatory hearing for the trial of eleven defendants.

Two people were defined by the Prosecutor’s Office as direct perpetrators of the crime of obstruction of justice, Wilman Teran and the former member of the entity, Maribel BarrenoThe remaining nine, as accomplices.

The central point is the process of dismissal of the judge Walter Maciasin which Barreno abstained from voting.

After hearing the arguments, the hearing was suspended so that the judge that is handling the case shall deliberate and issue its decision. This shall be convened by means of an order.

He Judge will have to set a new date to announce whether it will call those involved to trial. As of the afternoon of July 21, 2024, it was not known when the decision would be made.

Although it was not spread if Wilman Teran He was taken back to the maximum security prison The Rockin Guayas, where he is being held.

It was expected that this would happen, therefore, Judge He only requested that he appear in person at the trial preparatory hearing, so he was transferred to Quito.

Details of the hearing

The hearing was reinstated after part of the process had already been developed on July 19, in which Wilman Teran requested a oral habeas corpus.

He Former President of the National Council of the Judiciary was the first to intervene in the proceedings. He insisted on wanting to get out of jail and leave that “environment of violence” to exercise his defense.

During the hour and a half in which he presented his arguments, Wilman Teran He stressed that his actions were in accordance with the regulations.

According to him, Macías’ suspension was based precisely on those parameters. Terán stressed that he would do it again.

The defendant maintained that he fulfilled his duties and described the evidence as Prosecutor’s Office and the Attorney General’s Office as irrelevant.

Defense of Maribel Barreno

The defense attorney for Maribel BarrenOr, Christopher Gallegos, said that the Prosecutor’s Office does not have a solid case and has contaminated public opinion with its posts on social media.

The Lawyer said that the more than 150 elements of conviction that the Prosecutor’s Office presented are not conclusive and do not demonstrate an obstruction of justice. He recalled that Barrena did not dismiss Walter Macias. In fact, he abstained from voting.

Gallegos even referred to a systematic judicial persecution by the Prosecutor’s Office.

What is the Judicial Independence case?

The investigation of the Judicial Independence case began in 2022, for the alleged commission of the crime of influence peddling against the former members of the Council of the Judiciary.

The Prosecutor’s Office explained that, after the corresponding draw, the jurisdiction to process the case fell to the judge Walter Macias Fernandezwho set the hearing for May 4, 2023.

However, it was not installed, because the day before (on May 3), a request for recusal was filed against it. On May 11, 2023, the members of the plenary session of the Council of the Judiciary The judge was suspended from his duties, based on technical reports and memoranda issued by his subordinates. This despite the fact that the recusal was rejected. On March 8, 2023, an administrative complaint was filed against Judge Walter Macías, within the framework of the so-called case The Towers. This is for an alleged violation of not having informed the President of the National Court the request for recusal against Judge Adrián Rojas (judge of the Court of said case). The Prosecutor’s Office recapitulated that the Judicial Council qualified the administrative complaint as a “very serious infraction” and dismissed the judge. Judge Macias. According to Terán, during his defense in the impeachment trial in the AssemblyOn July 1, 2024, Macías should be prosecuted for influence peddling.

By: EL COMERCIO