Humala, former president, asserts 15-year sentence as politically motivated and files an appeal alongside Nadine Heredia.
In a surprising turn of events, Ollanta Humala Tasso and his wife, Nadine Heredia, were slapped with a 15-year prison sentence for alleged illicit campaign contributions during their presidential run. However, the former president couldn't attend the court session due to health issues, while Nadine Heredia seeks asylum in Brazil. The pair has lodged an appeal against the verdict.
Is something familiar happening with Pedro Castillo? Well, it appears his case shares some resemblance. During a virtual hearing lasting eight hours, the sentences of others linked to Humala and Heredia's case were also revealed. Notable individuals among them include Antonia Alarcón, Rocío Calderón, and Mario Julio Torres Aliaga, who too have announced their intention to appeal the verdicts issued against them. More information about these sentences will be evaluated once all appeals are notified in writing.
Taking to social media, the former president expressed discontent towards the verdict, terming it "far from the law." He argued that they haven't determined the illicit origin of the alleged involved funds nor established if it entered Peru or was received by them. Furthermore, he questioned the validity of certain documents used during the proceedings and claimed that some were annulled in Brazil for being deemed illegal.
"This wasn't a judicial decision; it's a political decision that tries, without success, to justify a sentence against our family and leaders of our political party," claimed Humala. He emphasized that despite being accused, they provided essential documents and testimonies to refute the accusations, which were apparently overlooked during the proceedings.
Interestingly, Julio César Espinoza, the lawyer for Nadine Heredia, further questioned the use of discredited evidence related to the Structured Operations Division in Brazil. He asserted that the evidence presented by the Public Ministry originated in Brazil, which could potentially call the verdict into question.
Nadine Heredia herself has kept mum about her predicament. Nevertheless, she was recently seen shopping at a mall, allegedly stocking up on daily essentials since she and her son had only brought suitcases of clothes. While it's unclear if she'll make a public statement regarding her case, it's worth noting that she's currently residing in an apartment rented in Brazil by the collective of lawyers Prerrogativas.
In a nutshell, the case revolves around money laundering accusations linked to illegal campaign financing from Brazilian construction firm Odebrecht in the 2006 and 2011 presidential campaigns of Humala and Heredia. The couple maintains their innocence but is currently subject to a 15-year prison sentence, which could be affected by their appeals and potential extradition issues due to her asylum status in Brazil.
- The former Brazilian president, Pedro Castillo, may be facing a similar situation, as his case shares some resemblance.
- In a virtual hearing, sentences for other individuals linked to Ollanta Humala and Nadine Heredia's case were also announced, including Antonia Alarcón, Rocío Calderón, and Mario Julio Torres Aliaga, who have also announced their intention to appeal the verdicts issued against them.
- Julio César Espinoza, the lawyer for Nadine Heredia, has questioned the use of discredited evidence related to the Structured Operations Division in Brazil, asserting that it could potentially call the verdict into question.
- Humala and Heredia maintain their innocence, arguing that they haven't determined the illegitimate origin of the alleged involved funds and questioned the validity of certain documents used during the proceedings.
- Nadine Heredia's current status is uncertain, as she is residing in an apartment rented in Brazil by the collective of lawyers Prerrogativas, while she seeks asylum in Brazil and has lodged an appeal against the verdict.
