Suspicions, reproaches and an unexpected twist in the case of three million dollars against the country

Loretta Preska is a senior magistrate of the Southern District Court of New York and one of the people to whom Casa Rosada pays silent attention. After two decades in the private sector, she was appointed in 1992 by President George W. Bush to occupy a place in justice. From this corner of Manhattan, she built the brightest part of her career, which surged in 2009, when she was appointed Chief Justice, a chair earlier than she has since held. two years.

Judges and lawyers in New York consider Preska to be the heir to Thomas Griesa, famous in Argentina for settling the vulture fund litigation against the country for the implicit debt of 2001. The judge had a close relationship with his predecessor, He stayed with the Argentine records that he handled and became familiar with them before the death of Griesa, in 2017.

On the Preska desk lie three millionaire causes involving Argentina. The potential effects of these files, with political and economic diversions, have woven in recent weeks a network of suspicions, reproaches and strategies
THE NATION He reconstructed from the testimonies of people involved in the discussions and documents of the American judicial system.

The best-known demand concerns the nationalization of 51% of Spaniards.

Repsol

in

YPF

. The subject is followed personally by the Treasury's lawyer, Bernardo Saravia Frías, and "Pepín" Rodríguez Simón, director of the oil company and friend of the president.

Mauricio Macri

, although the Argentine representation is in the hands of Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom. The exchange rate and the vicissitudes of justice have left a heavy bill to the state, which last year alone, paid $ 70.5 million to this study, according to a request by the government. access to public information that would have
THE NATION at the Ministry of Finance.

In April 2015, three years after nationalization, Burford Capital Limited filed a lawsuit against the oil company and the state in the Southern District Court for alleged breach of commitments made with stockholders of YPF. Official sources estimate the cost of an unfavorable result at 3 billion US dollars.

The complainants badert that at the time of the nationalization, the company's bylaws were not respected, according to which those who remained at 51% had to make an offer to the rest of the members.

Argentina's strategy consists of two parts: responding in technical terms to every requirement of North American justice and attempting to transfer the dispute to local courts.

Burford is a megabuffet who buys essays for little money hoping to win much later. Has obtained from the Spanish justice the opportunity to sue Argentina as a result of the bankruptcy of Petersen Energía Inversora and Petersen Energía, companies created by the Eskenazi family in that country to avoid legal risks at the national level prior to the bankruptcy. buy a portion of YPF.

On-demand vehicles are uncomfortable for Cristina Kirchner. Not only because the supposed Argentinianization preferred by her husband to the Eskenazi was carried out through companies with a foreign domicile. Also because the former president might be forced to give more explanations if he corroborates a hint of the Casa Rosada and the YPF: that the local family – still administers the Bank of Santa Cruz, the land of Kirchner ruled by Alicia Kirchner – could be favored if Argentina lost in the stands.

The documents on file indicate that, on 4 March 2015, Prospect Investments LLC, the funder of the lawsuit, agreed with Petersen Energía Inversora and Petersen Energía on the terms of payment in the event of a positive result. On another page, they claim that the counterparty – the two companies – will keep 30% of all profits generated by the lawsuit.

The Eskenazi family claims that this has nothing to do with the companies it created because they were removed after its bankruptcy, after nationalization. The Argentine defense does not believe.

The suspicions of the administration of Mauricio Macri go beyond the borders and reach Repsol. For example, the Attorney General's Office – the highest legal advisory body of the state – had trouble finding who represented him on Iberian lands, where the former owner of YPF enjoyed a enlarged territorial presence.

The official representation in this country went to José María Alonso Puig, head of the Spanish Bar, who won the respect of Argentine officials by presenting a simulation action for the sale of the lawsuit. The prosecutor raises obvious questions, for example why the Iberian Justice did not first propose the trial to YPF itself, one of the main parties involved in the trial, and ended up pbad in the hands of a vulture fund.

YPF's demand generated shocks between April and the last days. The case had reached the US Supreme Court, which had to decide whether to accept it or not. But the highest body has opened a third door: he asked his opinion, not binding, to the so-called solicitor general, at the head of American lawyers. Last Tuesday, Christmas Francisco, a man in the administration of

Donald Trump

,
he recommended to the highest court of his country to reject the request of Argentina.

Even though it was a bucket of cold water, the government gave it a positive reading hours later. An official aware of the relationship with the

White House

He explained that the YPF trial is taking place in a general context in which the United States is trying to expand its jurisdiction over alleged corruption, such as that of FIFA Gate. In other words: when there are spurious facts, American justice seeks to be in the vanguard of the investigation. And they interpret that Francisco sees things as well, which is consistent with the argument presented by the Argentine defense before the Court.

Prior to this decision, Casa Rosada had deployed a diplomatic strategy to the White House parallel to the judicial strategy of the Preska District Court. Ambbadador Fernando Oris de Roa and attorneys from the Office of the Attorney General attended meetings at the State Department to support the local position with Mexican and Chilean diplomats, who in turn presented themselves as an amicus curiae ( Friend of the Court) financed by the Argentine State

Brazil and Colombia also sent diplomatic letters to the plaintiff at the same address. They were the fruit of the meeting with the position of Casa Rosada, but also of haste, because they did not arrive in "friends". Although the effort did not bear fruit before Francisco, some of the work may be materialized in the litigation.

The atmosphere in Buenos Aires also fell to the ground when in New York a decision of the House surprised everyone. Pending the court's response, a so-called clerk – much like the clerk of the court, without the rank of judge – ordered Preska on April 19 to open the lawsuit against the country on hold. Everyone suspected a black hand.

Argentina used the camera, which rejected the local claim. But the lawyers went to see the judge later. They exacerbated the care with which the words were expressed to indicate that they wanted a suspension – the equivalent of a precautionary medium – but without leaving Preska in the uncomfortable position of having to rebut a superior court. The judge accepted the request on April 22nd.

The fact that Preska went against a higher organization again distributed cards from a hand that seemed unfavorable to Casa Rosada, as observed on this side of the world. They show it as an independent judge, which emboldens them, especially when they find a drop in Burford's stock price, which they attribute to the decision made in the United States. They say the market anticipates the results.

Other derivatives of the case fuel the expectations of Argentine lawyers. In recent months, informal contacts have taken place between at least two government officials who have been pbading through Washington and people who blame Burford for their proximity and have suggested that the fund is willing to open a negotiation.

The supposed goodwill of the fund has been interpreted as a sign of weakness, so much so that Argentine lawyers have developed mixed feelings: although reason indicates the convenience of the trial in Argentina, something that will almost never happen They think they can enjoy a professional trial in New York. They are misled by the potential outcome of a Discovery petition, which would provide North American justice with visible relationships between the parties and badets that may be hidden today. Does the Eskenazi family have anything to do, despite what their spokesmen swear, with the lawsuit against the country? Or could the Kirchner administration have avoided the damage? These are questions whose answers would have greater political weight if they were accompanied by North American documentation. Perhaps the alternative that fights with judicial expediency is the one that brings smiles to politics at a time when Casa Rosada is guiding forces toward the electoral battle.

Another silent cause is worrying national leaders. This is called the PBI coupon, which currently represents a lower demand, but potentially damaging. It is also in the hands of Preska. Potential damage to public accounts estimated by the defense would rise to about US $ 3 billion, as this first step could open the door to further claims.

Last January, the Aurelius Fund filed a lawsuit against the country for US $ 83.7 million in New York courts for changing the basis for calculating the level of the economy (GDP ).
At the activity level, the bonus called Coupon PBI is linked. In 2014, when Axel Kicillof was Minister of the Economy, he announced that the growth of the previous year had been 3%, lower than the 3.22% established by these securities to pay. The government estimates that more and more requests may come from this side.

This is another litigation that takes political coloratura. Although the visible side is that of Kicillof, a possible sword of the formula Alberto Fernández-Cristina Kirchner in the province of Buenos Aires in the next elections, the arrows of Casa Rosada point against Roberto Lavagna and his former Secretary of Finance, Guillermo Nielsen They used it as a bait to lure bondholders into the debt swap concluded in 2005. A former official has been contacting Cambiemos executives in recent weeks to talk about it. After a brief exchange, current state officials have become suspicious again because of the many questions from the other side.

The official rancor with Lavagna suggests that he was offering investors a price related to the progress of the business after a crisis. After 2001 and a jolt in the following years, the economy was expected to grow, with which the state promised to pay a million.

The previous annoyance provoked unexpected coincidences between the government and some of the opposition. There are officials who are in agreement with Kicillof, who at the time was whispering against the former Minister for the fortune that was to be paid tied to the PBI coupon.

Preska must also decide on another forgotten request for the general public, but present for the Ministry of Finance. That's the percentage of holdouts (Argentine debt holders defaulting)
that they have not concluded the agreement concluded by the country with vulture funds in April 2016. As a result of the Griesa order and negotiations, several months after the change of command, the government has transferred 9,300 million US dollars to cancel the agreements with the holders of the bonds. retailers, including NML Capital, by Paul Singer, head of the dispute against Argentina. Although there has been a residual percentage of undisciplined obligors, their claims are counted in millions.