Ecuadortimes:

According to the Prosecutor’s Office, Pamela M.’s husband had an employment relationship with Odebrecht and received a monthly salary of $ 4,000 for legal advice.

The nexuses of the multinationals with high officials of the government of Rafael Correa, within the case of Arroz Verde, are revealed little by little. Prosecutor Ruth Amoroso said that the Odebrecht company made a transfer to the Nexo Global company for $ 130,000.

According to Amoroso, this company is “very close” to Pamela M. and Laura T., detained for alleged irregular contributions received by the government of Rafael Correa for the presidential campaigns of 2013 and sectionals of 2014.

The prosecutor said that Pamela’s husband M., Jimmy Salazar, had an employment relationship with Odebrecht and therefore received a salary of $ 4,000 for alleged legal advice. Pamela M. and Laura T., who are detained in the Latacunga prison, are prosecuted for the real contest of infractions in the crimes of bribery, conspiracy and influence peddling.

The Court of the Provincial Court of Justice, composed of the judges Fabián Fabara, Diana Fernández (speaker) and Maritza Romero, confirmed yesterday the imprisonment of both defendants. Fernandez said that on June 3 there was “evidence of flight” of Pamela M. when trying to travel to Mexico at dawn.

He paid $ 1,400 to advance the flight for that day. At the hearing, the prosecutor said that Odebrecht’s representative in Ecuador, Gerardo Pereira de Souza, maintained a “close” relationship with both defendants, including traveling to Brazil.

The prosecutor said that in some emails, Pereira de Souza sent the detainees the itinerary of the trip. Pablo Muñoz, Laura T.’s defense attorney, did not deny the trip, but noted that it was not financed by Odebrecht, but by the Constitutional Court and that they traveled through a seminar of judges.

Reports of the UAFE and SRI The Prosecutor’s Office has 21 days of prior investigation in the case. Amoroso detailed that the information for the formulation of charges was made based on information, including emails provided by Christian Zurita, from the La Fuente portal. But these documents were contrasted with the Financial and Economic Analysis Unit (UAFE) and the Internal Revenue Service (SRI).

A report from the last entity showed that Pamela M., who was exjueza of the Court and presidential adviser to Correa, had $ 360,977 in the last five years. While Laura T., who was an advisor to Pamela M., records in her accounts $ 210,000 from 2013 to 2018.

The links of Viviana Bonilla The version of the ex-ambassador Christian Viteri is a key piece in the investigations. According to the prosecutor, Viteri, in the version she rendered Monday at the Transparency and Anti-Corruption Unit, revealed that she received money from PAIS for the sectional elections of Viviana Bonilla’s candidacy.

Viteri would have indicated that both Pamela M., who worked until 2017 in the Constitutional Court, as Laura T., were in charge of making the payments. Even former Vice President Jorge Glas would have asked him to contact them. Laura T., up to the time of her detention, worked as an adviser 5 and 4 in the Constitutional Court, her salaries were $ 1,500 and $ 2,588, respectively.

She carried the agenda of Pamela M. meetings with the representatives of the multinationals, including Hidalgo & Hidalgo, Equitesa, Fopeca, Sanrib Corporation. The prosecutor indicated that the payments were in cash and crosses deposits.

In the raids on Pamela M.’s house, Jimmy Salazar’s Bank of America deposits were found. While in the house of Laura T. was found a bill of exchange for $ 90,000. The Prosecutor’s Office requested the search of department 4B of the Tucahuan building, which would be owned by Pamela M. (I)

Source: https://www.eltelegrafo.com.ec/noticias/judicial/12/nexoglobal-casoarrozverde-fiscalia

Fonte: http://www.ecuadortimes.net/nexo-global-is-an-intermediary-of-the-case-arroz-verde/

​Os textos, informações e opiniões publicados neste espaço são de total responsabilidade do(a) autor(a). Logo, não correspondem, necessariamente, ao ponto de vista do Central da Pauta.