Federal judge Marcelo Martínez De Giorgi
continued to object
to the opening of the cell phone of La Cámpora leader and former AFIP official Fabián “Conu” Rodríguez more than four months after his kidnapping in the case of illegal espionage on judges and prosecutors, but Once again, the Federal Chamber rejected his measures.
It happens to be a politically sensitive issue.
Kirchnerism is concerned about the possibility that Justice will find messages that reveal
other requests for espionage operations
on the “Conu” cell phone, in addition to the one made in 2022 to the then Minister of Social Development, Victoria Tolosa Paz. , internal enemy of the Cámpora.
And above all, communications from former AFIP officials and Buenos Aires governor Axel Kicillof with
other leaders of Kircherism.
The former director of Counterintelligence of the AFI and ultra K deputy Rodolfo Tailhade is also accused in the case.
Precisely, yesterday the Minister of Security, Patricia Bullrich, told La Nación + that in the Airport Security Police "
I found a parallel intelligence group linked to Tailhade."
The detained and prosecuted inorganic spy Zanchetta passed on the hacked chats of former Buenos Aires Security Minister Marcelo D'Alessandro to Tailhade in December 2022, as is accredited in the case.
First, the judge ordered that
he was going to select which part
of the cell phone content of Máximo Kirchner's trusted man was useful for the case in order to preserve his “right” to privacy.
But the prosecutor Carlos Stornelli and the complaints appealed and the Federal Chamber ordered that
all the
calls, audios and videos of the camper who hired the inorganic spy and retired police officer Ariel Zanchetta be analyzed in a hearing.
However, the judge ordered that the hearing
be via Zoom
, when the pandemic ended four years ago, and not in person.
Then, the prosecutor and the complaints appealed again to the Federal Chamber of Buenos Aires.
It involves opening the cell phone and other devices of the leader of La Cámpora.
Deputy K Rodolfo Tailhade and the inorganic spy Ariel Zanchetta
In a ruling, the court, with the unanimous support of Eduardo Farah, Roberto Boico and Martín Irurzun, recalled that it is the legitimate interest of prosecutors to know the evidence as “
representative of the general interests of society (art. 120 CN) and holder of criminal action
(art. 5, CPPN), to confront the elements of the case, argue about them and propose courses of action (arts. 198 and 199 of the CPPN, among others).”
And it is also a legitimate interest “that of the defense, which expressly alleged that among the material to which access is requested, there are things completely foreign to the object of the case and the objective of the measure of evidence, which make circumstances protected by the right to the privacy of those involved and their family group (article 19 of the National Constitution).”
However, the Criminal Procedure Code establishes “
the publicity of the summary for the parties
and its secrecy for those who do not have that character,” the chamber stressed.
Then, the court “ordered that the “processing” of the information must respect this normative mandate and be carried out with
the presence of the magistrate, the defense and the accusing parties, in a joint hearing
.
Based on these premises, the Chamber agreed “with what was alleged in the resources (of the prosecution and the complaint) that
a face-to-face hearing
(not virtual, given the possibilities that the transmission of data through that means generates) is the appropriate way to guarantee in the best possible way compliance with the parameters set by the Chamber, safeguarding all the interests at stake.”
And he asked to respect "the need for
registration
for subsequent control (by the means chosen) does not alter the essence of such conclusion, which will lead to revoking the appealed decree - and must proceed in accordance with what is indicated herein," he concluded in reference to to the filming of the procedure.