Former Vice President George Glass Still there Three sentences For Crime Related to its work Corruption.

The first two Sentence They are already firm (three judicial precedents have approved the sentence). It is Sentence From Six years in prison For Illegal intercourse If Odebrecht And another eight years in prison for bribery in this case Bribery.

The The third suffix He has been in jail for eight years Guess If Singu. That Failed Not yet Executed. The hearing is scheduled for May 11, 2022 Appeal In that sentence

Perseverance is called at 08:30, its benefits National Court of JusticeIn Quito.

Former Vice President George Glass and six others were convicted of embezzlement in the case. They want it The court Their announcement Innocent That Invalid.

On January 25, 2021, another court ruled that George Glass, former minister Carlos Pereza Yanuzelli, Wilson Pastor and another co-author would be sentenced. Crime From Guess. The judges sentenced him to eight years in prison.

Three more people involved in the case have been convicted Partner in crime And sentenced to four years in prison.

The purpose of legal assets

Persevere when installed Defense The accused have to appear in their court Argument Show that to them Customers They do not commit Crime. The prosecutor’s office may also oppose the lawyers’ statements.

Judges Luis Rivera, Felipe Cordova and Daniela Camacho will then consider the allegations and the grounds. In the end, they will decide whether to approve the sentence of the seven accused or not.

singe case

According to Prosecution investigation, The seven convicted took part in the irregular trial of an oil field in Sukumbios. The agency assured that there was damage Condition.

The court, which ruled in the first instance, determined that there was one Arbitrary arrangements Of Natural resources The actions of the state and those for their own benefit and those of third parties.

According to the test, Crime From Guess Was committed by awarding prizes Singue field exploration and exploitation agreement. During that process, without considering 100% of the proven hydrocarbon reserves for this oil field, setting a price of USD 33.50 per barrel would have cost the state.

The court added that the convicts “had special privileged information about the oil reserves in Singu and knew that their activities were not in accordance with the law for which they intended.”

Instead, Defense Those processed They refused Its an argument Prosecution And The court. At the time, lawyers indicated that Singur’s exploitation had resulted in a 500 million profit for the state and that the contractor’s fee was USD 27.50 and not USD 33.50.

Others Background One of the defenders was that the company released a study that established that there were more oil reserves in the case, did not comply with international regulations and could not be used for tenders.

By admin

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.