Odebrecht not convicted of bribery

SANTO DOMINGO – The case of more than $90 million in “bribes” admitted by the construction company Odebrecht has not been sanctioned, as the Supreme Court (SCJ) acquitted Ángel Rondón Rijo and Víctor Díaz Rúa in exchange for contracting works in the Dominican Republic.

The only person convicted in this case was businessman Rondón Rijo, as Víctor Díaz Rúa was cleared of the case and convicted only of illicit enrichment and money laundering.

From the archives, only the construction company Odebrecht was briefly hurt, as it admitted to paying $92 million in bribes in the Dominican Republic, money it had promised to pay to the Dominican government through an agreement but failed to comply and only paid part of it.

In the first instance, Díaz Rúa was found guilty of illegal enrichment and money laundering and sentenced to five years in prison and to pay a minimum wage of $200, while Rondón Rijo was sentenced to eight years in prison for state bribery and money laundering and to a fine equivalent to his salary of $200.

As for lawyer Conrado Pittaluga, the court acquitted him.

You can read: The Supreme Court acquitted Dias-Rua and Rondon in the Odebrecht case and ordered the return of all their assets

These sentences and the release of Pitaluga were approved by the National Regional Court of Appeal, so the case was appealed to the Supreme Court, which announced its decision on Friday, which included marrying the case without shipment and focusing on understanding this, deciding to acquit Rondón Rijo and Víctor Díaz Rúa, who must return to them the seized assets, which include luxury yachts, companies and farms.

According to documents released by the U.S. Department of Justice, Odebrecht officials admitted to paying about $788 million in bribes in 12 countries in Latin America and Africa, including the Dominican Republic.

You can read. Odebrecht Technique: A Historic Fiasco

Briber
With the Supreme Court ruling on Friday, the country is left in the dark about who was bribed by construction company Odebrecht, including lawmakers and government officials. Hipolito Mejia and Lionel Fernandez.

The case was criticized by many for the way the Attorney General’s Office prepared it, but as time went on, the substance of the case faded until the final verdict found all defendants not guilty.

The Odebrecht case in the Dominican Republic began in 2017 with 14 defendants and after four years and five months, only Rondón Rijo has been sentenced, since in the Díaz Rúa case he had been cleared of the file but was convicted of illegal enrichment and money laundering, of which he has now been acquitted.

The document was put into effect on May 29, 2017, with the arrest of Víctor Díaz Rúa, former Minister of Public Works; Andrés Bautista, former President of the Senate; Temístocles Montás, former Minister of Economy; Roberto Rodríguez, former Director of the National Institute of Drinking Water and Wastewater (Inapa); Radhamés Segura, former Executive Vice-President of the CDEEE; César Sánchez, former Director of the CDEEE; Ruddy González, former Deputy; Ángel Rondón, businessman and representative of Odebrecht; Máximo D’ Óleo, former administrator of the Dominican Hydroelectric Company (Egehid), and Conrado Pittaluga, lawyer and notary.

The other four defendants are: Bernardo Castellanos and then-legislators Julio Cesar Valentin, Tommy Garland and Alfredo Pacheco.

The images document the arrest and transfer of the accused to the New Town Court.

Over time, most were excluded from the archives, while others were released by the judiciary.

And…who will compensate for the damages now?

This is the question that must be answered before the Supreme Court can acquit the accused.

The issue arises because those who were acquitted and others originally in the case spent up to eight years in court, including time spent in prison as a coercive measure and enduring the disgrace of the public ministry.

The right to honor, respect and good name do not seem to matter when the prosecutor’s office decides to investigate a suspect, a process that must be protected by sacred confidentiality, especially when the presumption of innocence for the suspect and a verdict of acquittal intervene along the way in case, as happened in this case.

The spreading of accusations and the arrest of accused persons were done in a jovial manner, without regard for family, the right to honour and the presumption of innocence.