Tribunal de la CC niega el pedido de ampliación y acclaration presented by Rafael Correa ante la inadmiszion de su accionion extraordinaire de protection | Politics | Notice

March 12, 2021 – 11h19

The Tribunal de la Sala de Admisión de la Corte Constitucional (CC), integrada por los jueces Carmen Corral, Enrique Herrería y Alí Lozada Prado, here is the amplification and clarification petition presented by the defense of former President Rafael Correa ante the resolution of the mayor that inaugurated the extraordinary action of plantation ante the organism against the sentence by aggravated passive cohort, inside the case Sobornos 2012-2016, issued by the Corte Nacional de Justicia (CNJ)

The defense’s defense stands as a pretense that it amplifies and clarifies the argument of point 34 of the car of 08 February 2021 in the that the notice of his protection action has been notified. To obtain the requisition, transcribe paragraph 34 of the appeal, as well as the final paragraph of point 4.3 of his application, concluding that “(…) the petition contains arguments that explain the violation of the right to defense by the failure of the congress to disclose the classification of the type respecting the cass versaba the investigation and criminal proceedings ”.

Rafael Correa has just filed a lawsuit to return his condensate in the Soborn case

Rafael Correa mantiene, since the finals of September passed, a sentence in company as mediator of the offense of cohesive passive aggravated. The case with it includes a condensed year of imprisonment and a payment of $ 778,000 as a repair for the State.

The sentence of 4 February passed with the vote of the mayor of the constitutional juices Ramiro Ávila and Carmen Corral to submit the extraordinary protection action presented only by Correa, signed by five more. As constitutional judge Daniela Salazar issued a salvaged vote in admitting the appeals specifying the charges.

At point 34 of the Correa’s Resolution on Correa, it is explained: “In view of the presumptive breach of the right to the defense defected in the failure of the congress (…), the plaintiff does not present a sufficient argument for respect of the guarantee analyzed and its allegations are central in considering that the action of the Corte Nacional it is a “monumental mistake” that vulnerability in the defense, it is said, that the allegation is related to its non-compliance with an action that allows to prevent a constitutional violation “.

The salazar juice in its salvaged vote in relation to the former Correa admits only the “wreck related to the presumed provoked child for the non-observance of the principle of congressional agreement between taxation and sentence ”.

Tribunal de la CC, con vote de mayoría, inadmite recurso extraordinario de protecjonón de Rafael Correa y otros 15 sentenciados en el case Sobornos

According to the analysis that the CC Tribunal has requested in order to avoid the request for amplification and clarification, it is considered that the application is improper, “there are no elements that permit it to be identified. amplify what is required to clear in the car impugnado; and on the other hand, consider that the request is complete with the legal requirements determined for its admission, its finalization in the writ of amplification and declaration is oriented to the revocation of the decision of inadmissibility, which is not subject to any circumcision ”.

The resolution of the amplification and declaration requested by the Correa exterminator was adopted on the 26th of February, but was notified to the parties in the month of this quarter.

About this same process in the CC is known as the constitutional juices Corral, Herrería and Lozada Ponce retrieval of revocation notices against the resolution of inadmissibility of the extraordinary redress of protection presented by the businessmen Teodoro Calle and Edgar Roman Salas. Ambos is part of the list of 20 sentinels in the case Sobornos and will receive a penalty of eight years of imprisonment and the cancellation of $ 778,000 as full compensation as the authors of the debt dispute. (I)