CONFISCATIONS/ Bankruptcy trial

Bankruptcy trial:
final chapter
in order to keep the confiscated assets
and to leave those who managed them corruptly in impunity.
The trial was planned to cover up those to squandered assets and withheld the television stations.
On March 7th and 19th of 2014, the siblings Roberto and William Isaias were cited in the press to either pay or hand over assets in the amount of 1.088 billion USD, within the next three days, a capricious sum since the payment ruling that resulted from the administrative resolution in lieu of trial filed by the UGEDEP on April 12, 2012, was for less than half that amount: 477 million USD. Afterwards, during that trial, invented sums appear for the express purpose of intending to compare the value of the confiscated assets with the alleged debt and thereby avoiding any accountability whatsoever.

The bankruptcy trial initiated 4 years after the confiscation constitutes the last judicial step to conclude the illegal “seizure” of the Correa Government. This trial once again violates the rights of due process and human rights of the accused and is intent on impeding the defense from accessing information on the state of the confiscated assets and the utilization of the funds generated from said assets at the hands of the corrupt State administration.

Everything was planned in order to cover up those who had looted the confiscated assets and keep the television channels forever. This is evidenced by the parallel dates of the Criminal Court Sentence of March 12, 2014 and the bankruptcy trial that began on the 7th and 19th of the same year.

Totally defenseless

Once again this trial left the Isaias brothers totally defenseless. One of the possibilities that the administrative resolution in lieu of trial has, is that when the Judge hearing the case does not accept the arguments presented the parties have a recourse known as “exception trial to the administrative resolution in lieu of trial”.

On November 29, 2012, using the legitimate right to a defense the accused sought to file an exceptions trial but it was never heard. The Guayaquil office of the District Court of Contentious Administration never uttered a word on this matter. It did not deny the request either and didn’t even to bother mentioning the illegal Mandate 13. That’s how the impossibility of discussing “arguments” of the administrative resolution in lieu of trial in other forums came to be consecrated.

More due process violations and discrimination  

Throughout this torturous process of account liquidation, the following needs to be singled out:

  1. The UGEDEP never presented any accountability,  cancellation or supporting documentation from the bank to the Isaias defense, as it should have done.

  2. The UGEDEP never accounted for any of the confiscated businesses nor did they establish what profits were earned.  It is unknown what they did with the money in cash that existed at the time of seizure or how they disposed of the assets.

  3. The UGEDEP did not render any accountability as to the value, sale or actual state of the assets that are still in their possession.

  4. Unknown is why the UGEDEP used the report by Deloitte & Touche, the report that did not determine losses, as a calculation base to determine the amount that the former shareholders of Filanbanco are responsible for. However, for the shareholders of the other 25 banks, that closed their doors during the banking crisis of the last century, a calculation was made for each of their asset losses established on their balance sheets which clearly demonstrates discriminatory prejudice towards the Isaias brothers.

  5. It intended on charging the Isaias brothers for uncollected debts by State Filanbanco’s clients and not for the payment that the UGEDEP supposedly made to the depositors as required by law. The Government never paid any depositor of Filanbanco corresponding to the Isaias administration simply because no depositor suffered any loss during their administration.

  6. In 1998 when the loans from the Central Bank were given to Filanbanco, they demanded guarantees that would cover 130% of the funds loaned. At the time the private administrators asked the State to authorize the voluntary liquidation of the bank at their behest, a request that was denied by the authorities at that time. If the bank had been liquidated the assets of the Bank would have generated a surplus.

  7. The political interest was always prevalent. During the crisis of 1999, they used Filanbanco as a vehicle to rescue other banks. In 2008, the story repeats itself with the confiscations, the only intention was to seize the television channels as a political platform and throw a party with the confiscated assets and businesses, plunder them then bankrupt them and never be accountable to anyone just like they did with Filanbanco.

  8. The Correa regime first used an administrative resolution in lieu of trial and then the magistrates in charge of the bankruptcy trial, as instruments to seal the illegal and illegitimate confiscation of assets worth over 1 billion USD.

It is obvious that these judges heard the bankruptcy trials violating due process and avoiding what an impartial Judge of Accounts should have done: balance the accounts based on the law and the current rules and not accommodating them in favor of the regime. As a collector of monies he should have entered the due amount and not one that doesn’t exist.

In spite of the evidence presented for the administrative resolution in lieu of trial, the judge did not authorize the Financial Coordination of the UGEDEP to present its current liquidation applying the accounts as it should but instead used some “execution accounts” of the rescued or liquidated banks and not those being restructured, as in the case of Filanbanco.

The judge also allowed  Filanbanco to be charged for the accounts of La Previsora and Previsora International Bank; he issued a payment ruling in one amount and later allowed the addition of other sums that had nothing to do with the original payment.

All audiovisual and photographic resourses used within this website, are used for editorial purposes only