The Chilean Council of State opened the will of Pinochet's widow to “recover the embezzled resources”
The entity had filed a complaint so that the dictator's heirs are in charge of paying the Treasury the nearly 16 million dollars obtained illegally< /i>
The Chilean Council of State opened the will of Pinochet's widow to “recover the embezzled resources” (EFE)
The will of Lucía Hiriart, the dictator's widow Augusto Pinochet, was opened this Wednesday. The action stemmed from a lawsuit that the State Defense Council (CDE) had filed against the testamentary heirs of the former president for “porvecho del dolo alieno”.
The private complaint is added to the “set of actions carried out by the CDE with the purpose of recovering the resources embezzled by it (Pinochet) and his collaborators,” according to the agency said in a statement.
Thus, the Council seeks that Pinochet's heirs be sentenced to pay the Treasury the close to 16 million dollars which -they estimate- corresponds to the money that the dictator obtained illegally.
“Although it was not proven that (their heirs) had participated in the illicit acts, they would be recipients of an economic benefit that was the result of fully demonstrated criminal conduct,” continues the letter from the CDE in which the action on Wednesday is justified. carried out in the Sixteenth Civil Court of Santiago de Chile.
The Council seeks that Pinochet's heirs pay the Treasury the close to 16 million dollars that the dictator obtained illegally
Hiriart played a key role in Pinochet's life since he was who exerted the greatest influence on him so that he would participate in the coup uprising that overthrew the government of Salvador Allendein 1973, just three years after taking office. Likewise, after the recovery of democracy, she was singled out on multiple occasions for the fortune that her family had managed to accumulate in her years of absolute power.
For her part, in 2018, the Supreme Court had closed the Riggs case, the case for which the dictator and other people were being investigated for embezzlement of public funds through secret bank accounts in the < b>Riggs Bank of the United States. That year, the Justice decided that three of the general's collaborators should be sentenced as perpetrators of the crime and, thanks to this, it was possible to undertake a series of legal actions to recover the defrauded money.
Pinochet was investigated in the case known as 'the Riggs case' that investigated the funds that he illegally had in US accounts
The investigation exposed that Pinochet indeed maintained multiple accounts under different identities in which he kept close to21 million dollars .
“The sentence decreed the confiscation of assets that were in the name of the former general or one of his companies, most of them offshore and with bearer shares,” the Council said at the time.
However, despite having proven the total amount of damage -of almost USD 18 million-, the Supreme Court considered that the sentence b> accessory confiscation could only fall on that part of the assets that were related to the intervention of the convicted. That is why, this Wednesday, it was a key resource in the recovery of the money.
The Justice assured that it is impossible to ignore that “there was more than sufficient probative evidence” that Pinochet “involved in conduct that amounted to the theft of public funds” (EFE)
The Court added that it is impossible to ignore that “there was more than enough probative evidence” that Pinochet “involved in conduct that amounted to the theft of public funds” and, therefore, “it was possible and reasonable to deduce” that the assets could well be considered “the effects or product of the perpetration of their criminal conduct committed to the detriment of the national treasury.”
Previously, in 2014, the Justice had handed down sentence at first instance against six collaborators of the dictator for the embezzlement of 6.4 million dollars but, in 2017, the Court of Appeals of Santiago revoked the ruling appealing to the prescription of the facts to finally conclude, c on the 2018 ruling.
(With information from EFE)