While the debate about the speed that procedural deadlines should have in Argentina remains unresolved, unlike the federal jurisdiction, which seems to have found the “hole in the mate” with the new accusatory model -Federal Criminal Procedure Code-, in Salta there are causes of ordinary jurisdiction that seem to be “eternal”, with the harm that this means both for those who are innocent and must wait behind bars and for the victims of atrocious acts.
Time in which, in addition to the lethargy when waiting for a resolution, other aspects are added, such as unusual and unfair rulings. One of them was the one resolved by Chamber III of the Court of Appeal, in 2016, which had revoked the acquittal of Santos Clemente Vera, to sentence him to life in the case of the double crime of the French tourists.
It is the same Chamber III that has not issued a ruling for almost two years following the Cassation appeals filed by the parties after the ruling against former fashion producer Pablo Marcelo Rangeón.
“It is not normal for two years to pass, obviously they have exceeded the deadline when issuing it, primarily affecting the victims, because for there to be effective access to Justice it has to be timely,” he said in dialogue with The Tribune Dr. Sandra Domene, plaintiff lawyer in the case along with Sergio Agüero.
Rangeón, arrested on March 6, 2021, was sentenced on Friday, July 22, 2022 to seven years of effective prison for being guilty of the crime of sexual abuse with carnal access to the detriment of CFR
In that same case, the judges of Chamber V of the Trial Court decided to acquit him with the benefit of the doubt of the crimes of sexual abuse with continued carnal access to the detriment of SYG; sexual abuse with carnal access and fraud to the detriment of JPRP; simple sexual abuse to the detriment of MLB; continued simple sexual abuse to the detriment of MPGE and sexual abuse with carnal access to the detriment of CVA
Possible scenarios
Following the legal guidelines in the country, Chamber III of the Court of Appeal, as presented by the parties, can confirm the sentence, extend the sentence, acquit or can also order a new trial.
After the ruling and the reasons for the ruling against Rangeón, the prosecutor’s office led by Pablo Alejandro Rivero and the plaintiff requested to extend the sentence, given that of the six women who reported him, including a minor, he was only convicted for the complaint of one of them.
The defense of the former fashion producer from Salta, led by doctors Luciano Romano – he stopped being a defender – and Fernando Díaz Zabalaga, combined the sentence imposed and requested outright absolution, and in a subsidiary way absolution for the benefit of the doubt .
While the prisoner serves his sentence in a cell in Villa Las Rosas, and his victims wait daily for justice to be done, in Chamber III of the Impeachment Court they continue to take their time in a case that they consider “extensive.”
The path that the parties have to follow after the Challenge is the complaint appeal first before the Court of Justice of Salta, then the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights.
The immediate antecedent
Based on a ruling by the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation in which they revoked the life imprisonment imposed by Chamber III of the Impeachment Court of Salta, composed of Eduardo Nallar and Luciano Martini, against Santos Clemente Vera, within the framework of the case of the French tourists, the Court of Appeal of Salta must this time review the case with the power to aggravate the sentence, confirm, acquit or order a new trial, but it cannot convict again in the face of an acquittal.
