Despite of United States request to seize the suspicious Venezuelan plane, held in Argentina since last June 6, the realization of that application is not easy. Not only because of the political implications of the measure, but also because of the judicial and administrative difficulties involved in its implementation, judicial sources told THE NATION.
The aircraft, an Emtrasur Boeing 747, is for two months immobilized in Ezeiza and the Justice ordered that of the 19 crew members, five Iranians and 14 Venezuelans, seven of them remain in Buenos Aires and 12 are free to return to their country.
Coinciding with this court decision, the United States Department of Justice informed Argentina that a court in Columbia had issued an order to seize the plane, since it understands that the North American aircraft passed into the hands of an Iranian company, Mahan Air, accused by its alleged links to Hezbollah, and then to the Venezuelan Emtrasur, also sanctioned by the United States.
The United States Department of Commerce also issued an administrative measure that prevents the plane from passing from Iran to Venezuela and prohibits it from flying between Tehran and Caracas.
:quality(80)/cloudfront-us-east-1.images.arcpublishing.com/lanacionar/74XXPICIMZD5JBN2GURQ4G5CHI)
The US measures motivated Nicholas Maduro publicly complained that the United States wanted to steal the old Boeing from the Venezuelan state airline.
The request of the justice of the United States has not yet arrived to the judicial case that federal judge Federico Villena and the prosecutor are carrying out Cecilia Incardona.
In matters of judicial cooperation between Argentina and the United States, the Ministry of Justice, unlike what happens with any other country where the Foreign Ministry intervenes. The role of the Ministry of Justice is that of a “currier”, it has no decision, nor interference in the North American request.
Once the formal request arrives in the country, two simultaneous situations: on the one hand, to process the matter as an international embargo request. In this case, issues of international law come into play and it would be appropriate to allow the confiscation request, only if the legal norms in force in the United States have a similar norm in Argentine legislation.
As if it were an extradition request, in which the crime for which the sending of a person is requested It must be contemplated in both legislations. This procedure would be cumbersome because the company or Venezuela can ask to intervene in the file and can make their requirements, oppositions and appeals, which would delay the judicial process for years.
Another alternative, which does not exclude the previous one, but can be processed simultaneously, is that Justice requests the Financial Information Unit (UIF) the administrative freezing of the plane, understanding that it is linked to companies that support terrorist organizations.
This idea is in study among the Argentine investigators, judicial sources told THE NATION.
Argentine law considers Hezbollah a terrorist organization and the FIU would have legal grounds to freeze the aircraft, since there is a decree that provides for this possibility and gives the anti-money laundering office those powers.
Of course, one issue is the administrative norm and another is the political implication, given that the FIU is aligned with the Kirchner movement that considers Maduro and Venezuela a friend.
There is a history of cases of freezing funds on suspicion that they could be linked to Hezbollah. In the previous government, the FIU froze funds from the Barakat clan, a family suspected of being linked to Hezbollah that allegedly carried out money laundering activities in the Iguazú casino.
The administrative measure of the FIU that froze the funds of the Barakats was later confirmed by the federal judge of Eldorado, Miguel Ángel Guerrero.