Lawyer for Ian Moche contests ruling to scrapped lawsuit against Javier Milei.
In a recent development, the lawyer for Ian Moche, a 12-year-old autistic boy, has filed an appeal to reopen his case that was previously closed in favour of President Javier Milei. The case revolves around a controversial tweet published by Milei on June 1, 2025.
The tweet, which can be found at this link: https://t.co/yE27aK1t6X, was initially ruled by Judge Alberto Recondo as not an "official or institutional communication account" of the National Executive Power. However, Andrés Gil Domínguez, Moche's lawyer, argues that the ruling was null and unjust due to lack of jurisdiction and violations of impartiality.
Gil Domínguez contends that Judge Recondo improperly declared himself competent to hear the case by accepting that Milei was acting as president in this matter, which should instead have been handled by civil courts. The lawyer claims that by publicly endorsing an insulting publication against a child with a disability, the President performed an action with a clear symbolic, discursive, and institutional charge.
The appeal also emphasizes ethical concerns with Judge Recondo’s conduct. Gil Domínguez argues that the judge’s public statements violated judicial ethical standards, compromising his impartiality and objectivity. For example, Recondo had publicly said that if he were Moche’s parent, he would not expose the child to media scrutiny, suggesting bias. The defense claimed this reflected an ideological alignment with supporters ("trolls") who attacked Ian Moche online, which they say contributed to the nullity of the original ruling.
Gil Domínguez disputes the judge's argument that retweeting a message is not endorsing it. He states that when a user reposts an offensive message and expresses agreement or endorsement, they become active participants in the reproduction and amplification of the damage. The lawyer claims that the sentence incurs an insurmountable contradiction because if Milei acted "in a personal capacity [and not as President], then the judge should have rejected the action."
The appeal has been accepted for review by the La Plata Federal Court of Appeals, advancing the procedural effort to have the case reconsidered. In the meantime, Gil Domínguez has also asked that the President be ordered to refrain from making similar social media posts.
Marlene, Moche's mother, is described as brave, intelligent, empathetic, committed, and solidary. She has been a vocal advocate for her son's rights and has been instrumental in bringing this case to light.
Judge Recondo maintained that the President has the right to express himself freely "as a citizen" regardless of his position. However, the judge's ruling also stated that public officials can act on behalf of the State, but they are also private citizens with their own constitutional rights. Gil Domínguez argues that Recondo's ruling is null because the judge argued that the President had the right to express himself "as a citizen", which is what he did.
The lawyer questions the public statements made by Judge Recondo on Tuesday, implying an objective violation of ethical rules for judges regarding ensuring their impartiality. This legal battle promises to be a significant test of the boundaries of free speech and the role of public figures in the digital age.
Read also:
- Weekly happenings in the German Federal Parliament (Bundestag)
- Southwest region's most popular posts, accompanied by an inquiry:
- Discussion between Putin and Trump in Alaska could potentially overshadow Ukraine's concerns
- Tinubu's administration allegedly causing issues within every political party as Peter Obi's name surfaces - Obidient Movement asserts
